Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

US gun owners show off their Christmas 'toys'


  • Please log in to reply
361 replies to this topic

#31 Common sense

Common sense

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,742 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 30 December 2012 - 09:54 PM

Once again....who cares? This story is being milked drier than a cow in the desert.
  • 0

#32 Uncommon Sense

Uncommon Sense

    K-Wing Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Joined: 08-December 12

Posted 30 December 2012 - 10:26 PM

This story is pretty interesting and bizarre. If people don't think so, they should stop reading it instead of shooting their mouths off complaining about it.
  • 2

#33 canadiancon

canadiancon

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 41 posts
  • Joined: 25-July 12

Posted 30 December 2012 - 10:40 PM

People on this forum make me sick.

They have no idea about guns and make ignorant comments on the matter. Who cares that those guns are called "assault rifles" they are still semi automatic.

I can go purchase a mini 14 hunting rifle, semi automatic firing .223 rounds the exact same bullet as that ar-15 and shoot it just as fast. Also with full metal jacket bullets that will punch through a Bullet proof vest.

How about an sks firing ak-47 rounds with 30 shot clips.

That's just 2 "hunting" rifles I can go buy at any gun store in BC.

So city slickers that have ZERO idea about guns and believe everything they read should stop commenting. And also saying they have no purpose but to kill people is a retarded statement.

People like to target shoot, go out to the range and blast off a few hundred rounds, it's awesome but it doesn't mean we are red necks who want to kill people.

All the guns used in the recent shootings in the states might not be purchasable in Canada, but anyone with a gun licence can buy a gun that will do as much, or more damage.

I own lots of guns and have lots of ammo, semi auto, shotguns etc. does that mean I'm going to go on a rampage? Nope, it just means I like to hunt and have fun like 95% of people who hve guns.
  • 3

#34 woofwoofmoomoo

woofwoofmoomoo

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 73 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 11

Posted 30 December 2012 - 11:14 PM

People on this forum make me sick.

They have no idea about guns and make ignorant comments on the matter. Who cares that those guns are called "assault rifles" they are still semi automatic.

I can go purchase a mini 14 hunting rifle, semi automatic firing .223 rounds the exact same bullet as that ar-15 and shoot it just as fast. Also with full metal jacket bullets that will punch through a Bullet proof vest.

How about an sks firing ak-47 rounds with 30 shot clips.

That's just 2 "hunting" rifles I can go buy at any gun store in BC.

So city slickers that have ZERO idea about guns and believe everything they read should stop commenting. And also saying they have no purpose but to kill people is a retarded statement.

People like to target shoot, go out to the range and blast off a few hundred rounds, it's awesome but it doesn't mean we are red necks who want to kill people.

All the guns used in the recent shootings in the states might not be purchasable in Canada, but anyone with a gun licence can buy a gun that will do as much, or more damage.

I own lots of guns and have lots of ammo, semi auto, shotguns etc. does that mean I'm going to go on a rampage? Nope, it just means I like to hunt and have fun like 95% of people who hve guns.

So? So was the Conn. shooter's mother. Go tell the parents of the children who were killed in the shooting about your little "hobby" and see what they say.
  • 2

#35 Common sense

Common sense

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,742 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 30 December 2012 - 11:32 PM

So? So was the Conn. shooter's mother. Go tell the parents of the children who were killed in the shooting about your little "hobby" and see what they say.


Go tell them I own a gun, and I have no mental health illnesses. I'll stress this more (and in caps) - NO MENTAL HEALTH ILLNESSES.
  • 0

#36 canadiancon

canadiancon

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 41 posts
  • Joined: 25-July 12

Posted 30 December 2012 - 11:35 PM

So? So was the Conn. shooter's mother. Go tell the parents of the children who were killed in the shooting about your little "hobby" and see what they say.


Your missing the point, sure you might be able to ban assault rifles, but an ordinary hunting rifle can do the same damage.

Guns will never be banned complety, and even if they were it wouldn't be hard to acquire one.

Also it's not a hobby, it's a lifestyle, it's how I put food on my table, and if it came down to it, it's how I would protect my family.
  • 0

#37 Common sense

Common sense

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,742 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 30 December 2012 - 11:35 PM

The inbreeding is strong with these ones.

The fact that someone would go out and buy a bushmaster after hearing that it was the gun used to slaughter children, is just sick.


My friend bought a Canucks jersey after June 15, 2011 - the same one the rioters wore. Should I shun him?

Seriously...I'm turning to CDC for advice because this forum and some of its members are oh-so-authoritative on every single issue out there. Now, I'm sure a majority of you don't own Canucks jerseys or have ever worn one, but why the hell not...apparently, your collective advice is more valid than someone else that has.
  • 0

#38 Gumballthechewy

Gumballthechewy

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,905 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 11

Posted 30 December 2012 - 11:39 PM

You can buy a Bushmaster .223 Remington SuperLight Carbine Semiautomatic Rifle for $699.00.
Posted Image
http://www.academy.c...10051_473701_-1

Less than some top end hockey skates.


You are so full of knowledge, I love you!

Your missing the point, sure you might be able to ban assault rifles, but an ordinary hunting rifle can do the same damage.


An assault rifle is a weapon made for the soul purpose of killing a large amount of people as fast and efficiently as possible. They usually have high rates of fire and large magazines.

A hunting rife is a weapon designed for... hunting. They usually have low rates of fire and small magazines.

A bullet is deadly no matter what gun it's being fired from but comparing a hunting rife to an assault rifle is just plain stupid.

Edited by Gumballthechewy, 30 December 2012 - 11:52 PM.

  • 1

Don't take anything I say seriously! EVER!


#39 Jägermeister

Jägermeister

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,218 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 30 December 2012 - 11:57 PM

The only real issue I would have with people getting a gun as a gift is if they were given without the recipient having gone through some sort of process to make sure they were stable enough to have a gun. I doubt that actually happened in some cases.
Well that and the fact that I still have no idea why somebody needs a semi-automatic rifle.
  • 0

Jagermeister.jpg


#40 canadiancon

canadiancon

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 41 posts
  • Joined: 25-July 12

Posted 31 December 2012 - 07:59 AM

You are so full of knowledge, I love you!



An assault rifle is a weapon made for the soul purpose of killing a large amount of people as fast and efficiently as possible. They usually have high rates of fire and large magazines.

A hunting rife is a weapon designed for... hunting. They usually have low rates of fire and small magazines.

A bullet is deadly no matter what gun it's being fired from but comparing a hunting rife to an assault rifle is just plain stupid.


You clearly didn't read my first post. A mini 14 firing the exact same round as the ar-15 used in the school shooting that just happened, can fire rounds just as fast. And it's a "hunting" rifle. And you can also get high capacity magazines for these.

There is nothing that special about these "assault" rifles that were used in the shootings. They are all semi auto. The only thing is that they look different.

So just because someone has an "assault" rifle, doesn't mean it's a deadly killing machine. Not all assault rifles are fully automatic. You could easily use an ar-15 for hunting, it just wouldnt be as accurate. most people purchase them over a semi auto hunting rifle because of the look.

A .22 with a 50 shot banana clip would do some damage on a group of people to. Fully legal in Canada.

People need to chill out, guns are here to stay and there is nothing that can be done about it.
  • 0

#41 inane

inane

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,105 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 07

Posted 31 December 2012 - 09:38 AM

Basically any weapon that can fire rapidly shouldn't be allowed. There is no reason to own one. You want to hunt? Fine, shoot reload shoot reload that's fine. You want to shoot like crazy at a gun range? Fine, with their weapons in approved locations. Why people need guns, whatever you want to call them, that can shoot multiple rounds rapidly is beyond me.
  • 0

#42 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,016 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 31 December 2012 - 09:49 AM

People on this forum make me sick.

They have no idea about guns and make ignorant comments on the matter. Who cares that those guns are called "assault rifles" they are still semi automatic.

I can go purchase a mini 14 hunting rifle, semi automatic firing .223 rounds the exact same bullet as that ar-15 and shoot it just as fast. Also with full metal jacket bullets that will punch through a Bullet proof vest.

How about an sks firing ak-47 rounds with 30 shot clips.

That's just 2 "hunting" rifles I can go buy at any gun store in BC.

So city slickers that have ZERO idea about guns and believe everything they read should stop commenting. And also saying they have no purpose but to kill people is a retarded statement.

People like to target shoot, go out to the range and blast off a few hundred rounds, it's awesome but it doesn't mean we are red necks who want to kill people.

All the guns used in the recent shootings in the states might not be purchasable in Canada, but anyone with a gun licence can buy a gun that will do as much, or more damage.

I own lots of guns and have lots of ammo, semi auto, shotguns etc. does that mean I'm going to go on a rampage? Nope, it just means I like to hunt and have fun like 95% of people who hve guns.


So 1 out of 20 mental defectives with a gun is acceptable to you? .. you folks self-diagnosing your "mental stability" is NOT re-assuring to the un-annointed masses .. semi-automatics are for folks who are lacking confidence to get the job done with one or two shots .. "billy blast-em" types .. it would be funny if it was not so twinged with tragedy ..
  • 1

"To Thine Own Self Be True"

 

"Always tell the Truth. That way, you don’t have to remember what you said"  ~ Mark Twain ~
 


#43 Wetcoaster

Wetcoaster

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,454 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 04

Posted 31 December 2012 - 01:27 PM

Basically any weapon that can fire rapidly shouldn't be allowed. There is no reason to own one. You want to hunt? Fine, shoot reload shoot reload that's fine. You want to shoot like crazy at a gun range? Fine, with their weapons in approved locations. Why people need guns, whatever you want to call them, that can shoot multiple rounds rapidly is beyond me.

The position of federal Liberal leadership candidate Marc Garneau appears to be classifying all semiautomatic firearms as restricted.
http://forum.canucks.../#entry11021445

As it currently stands any restricted firearm cannot be used for hunting and is only to be discharged on an approved target range. It also requires an authorization to transport and be kept in secure storage with a trigger lock.
http://www.rcmp-grc....eposage-eng.htm


The AR-15 is a civilianized version of the M-16, the standard rifle used by the U.S. military. In Canada, only the semi-automatic version may be legally purchased by qualified buyers. The description of it as an “assault rifle” is subjective not entirely accurate. It is not legal for hunting and clearly has military heritage, but the AR-15 is functionally different than the military-issue M-16.


Semi-automatic means a round is fired with each pull of the trigger and another round is automatically moved into the chamber. It cannot fire a continuous stream of bullets like a fully-automatic rifle, and it is not capable of burst modes of three shots with one trigger pull. There are enormous numbers of semi-automatic rifles in Canada that are not restricted and, since the Conservative government scrapped the long-gun registry, no longer have to be registered.


We don’t have any recent data on the number of AR-15s in Canada but records I obtained through an Access to Information request to the RCMP in 2007 give a rough idea of the rifle’s popularity.


The data from the Canadian Firearms Centre showed 3,873 AR-15s and variants had been legally registered to businesses or individuals (that is, not military or the police).


In the downtown Ottawa area defined by the K1 postal code zone, where I live, the data show that there are 36 AR-15s registered to individuals or businesses. By comparison, there are 124 public and Catholic schools in the same area.


There are some important considerations in comparing Canada’s arsenal of AR-15 to those in the U.S.


Reports from Newtown suggest the shooter used magazines of 30 rounds. That means he could have fired 30 times without stopping to reload. In Canada, since Polytechnique, these high-capacity magazines have been illegal to sell or purchase. Only five round magazines can be used with the restricted-class AR-15.


Also, in Canada, it is illegal to use the AR-15 anywhere but on a gun range. Of course, that’s a meaningless restriction for anyone who has access to the weapon and is intent on doing harm with it — like Kimveer Gill, who took his entirely-legal Beretta Storm to Dawson College and killed 18-year-old Anastasia De Sousa and wounded many others.

http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2012/12/19/ar-15s-dont-kill-people-people-kill-people/
  • 0
To err is human - but to really screw up you need a computer.

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it.

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

Illegitimi non carborundum.

Never try to teach a pig to sing - it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

#44 Electro Rock

Electro Rock

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,681 posts
  • Joined: 17-March 04

Posted 31 December 2012 - 01:34 PM

Americans have been giving and receiving guns for hundreds of years, Canadians too for that matter, why is it such a big deal now?
  • 2
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."

Norman Thomas

#45 Wetcoaster

Wetcoaster

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,454 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 04

Posted 31 December 2012 - 01:44 PM

Americans have been giving and receiving guns for hundreds of years, Canadians too for that matter, why is it such a big deal now?

You seriously are asking that question after viewing the pictures of the firearms attached to the article?
  • 0
To err is human - but to really screw up you need a computer.

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it.

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

Illegitimi non carborundum.

Never try to teach a pig to sing - it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

#46 Electro Rock

Electro Rock

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,681 posts
  • Joined: 17-March 04

Posted 31 December 2012 - 02:27 PM

You seriously are asking that question after viewing the pictures of the firearms attached to the article?


Yes I am.

Is it the rifles that scare you?

I'll say this, just because a rifle design doesn't date back to the 19th or early 20th century, it doesn't mean that the owner is a mass murder or an extremist.

AR-15s have been around for close to 60 years now, they are now mainstream just as all the military derived rifles (which is nearly all traditional hunting rifles) before them are mainstream.

Technology moves on, just as it would be unreasonable to expect people to be restricted to using 100 year old communications technology, so too is it unreasonable to restrict them to 100 year old firearms designs.

Even the older design firearms aren't safe from the control crowd, they've started to become stigmatized as "sniper rifles" and other things.
  • 0
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."

Norman Thomas

#47 Wetcoaster

Wetcoaster

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,454 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 04

Posted 31 December 2012 - 02:49 PM

Yes I am.

Is it the rifles that scare you?

I'll say this, just because a rifle design doesn't date back to the 19th or early 20th century, it doesn't mean that the owner is a mass murder or an extremist.

AR-15s have been around for close to 60 years now, they are now mainstream just as all the military derived rifles (which is nearly all traditional hunting rifles) before them are mainstream.

Technology moves on, just as it would be unreasonable to expect people to be restricted to using 100 year old communications technology, so too is it unreasonable to restrict them to 100 year old firearms designs.

Even the older design firearms aren't safe from the control crowd, they've started to become stigmatized as "sniper rifles" and other things.

And AR-15s and its variants have been the weapon of choice in mass shootings.

I grew up around firearms and learned to shoot and safely handle them from a young age. And I was later trained to shoot handguns.

What scares me in the US is the number of weapons and the huge magazines that can find their way easily into the hands of people without much in the way of background checks or training.

More guns, less regulation and way too many firearm homicides.
  • 0
To err is human - but to really screw up you need a computer.

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it.

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

Illegitimi non carborundum.

Never try to teach a pig to sing - it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

#48 Electro Rock

Electro Rock

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,681 posts
  • Joined: 17-March 04

Posted 31 December 2012 - 02:59 PM

And AR-15s and its variants have been the weapon of choice in mass shootings.

I grew up around firearms and learned to shoot and safely handle them from a young age. And I was later trained to shoot handguns.

What scares me in the US is the number of weapons and the huge magazines that can find their way easily into the hands of people without much in the way of background checks or training.

More guns, less regulation and way too many firearm homicides.


There are a LOT of AR-15s in the U.S., its basically their default civilian rifle now, however rifles as a whole only account for like 4 or 5% of U.S. firearms deaths, IIRC.

As for the rest, if you can't trust your law abiding citizens, who can you trust?
  • 0
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."

Norman Thomas

#49 Red Light Racicot

Red Light Racicot

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,606 posts
  • Joined: 28-June 10

Posted 31 December 2012 - 03:06 PM

People on this forum make me sick.


Everyone else is sick of gimps who cant seem to function normally without a firearm in their possession.

And also saying they have no purpose but to kill people is a retarded statement.


I have no idea why you even think this is up for debate. M-16s are designed to kill people. Tweaking them so they can be sold to civilians doesnt change that fact.
  • 1

#50 inane

inane

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,105 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 07

Posted 31 December 2012 - 03:13 PM

There are a LOT of AR-15s in the U.S., its basically their default civilian rifle now, however rifles as a whole only account for like 4 or 5% of U.S. firearms deaths, IIRC.

As for the rest, if you can't trust your law abiding citizens, who can you trust?


I'll ask you--at what point do you admit you can't trust people to not shoot themselves? Yes, there are law abiding gun owners who would never do anything bad, but with the daily stories of multiple murders/accidents/etc...can you trust for public enough to own guns? Are all the unnecessary deaths worth upholding that 'right'? Is there ever a point where you say enough is enough?
  • 0

#51 Electro Rock

Electro Rock

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,681 posts
  • Joined: 17-March 04

Posted 31 December 2012 - 03:26 PM

I'll ask you--at what point do you admit you can't trust people to not shoot themselves? Yes, there are law abiding gun owners who would never do anything bad, but with the daily stories of multiple murders/accidents/etc...can you trust for public enough to own guns? Are all the unnecessary deaths worth upholding that 'right'? Is there ever a point where you say enough is enough?


Not unless I wanted to say "enough is enough" with the rest of the United States Constitution.

None of this stuff was a serious problem before recent times, and it seems the same '60s generation responsible for changing society for the worst are the ones insisting they need to control guns and the internet.

  • 0
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."

Norman Thomas

#52 inane

inane

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,105 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 07

Posted 31 December 2012 - 03:28 PM

Not unless I wanted to say "enough is enough" with the rest of the United States Constitution.

None of this stuff was a serious problem before recent times, and it seems the same '60s generation responsible for changing society for the worst are the ones insisting they need to control guns and the internet.


Why do you feel in order to change a part of it you have to throw out all of it? It's been amended before....
  • 0

#53 Electro Rock

Electro Rock

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,681 posts
  • Joined: 17-March 04

Posted 31 December 2012 - 03:34 PM

Why do you feel in order to change a part of it you have to throw out all of it? It's been amended before....


The checks and balances that used to apply to U.S. decision making have so been badly eroded, and the actions of the power elite have been so disconcerting in recent years, that any attempt to make changes to the Constitution are not going to viewed in the same light as in the past.
  • 0
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."

Norman Thomas

#54 RUPERTKBD

RUPERTKBD

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,914 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 31 December 2012 - 03:56 PM

The checks and balances that used to apply to U.S. decision making have so been badly eroded, and the actions of the power elite have been so disconcerting in recent years, that any attempt to make changes to the Constitution are not going to viewed in the same light as in the past.


So, because there is a paranoid segment of the population that thinks that any changes to the constitution are going to result in the stripping of all of their rights, it's better to plug your ears, close your eyes and pretend that everything's kosher?
  • 0
Orland Kurtenbach and Dennis Kearns had just been torched 8-1 by the Habs, but they still took time to come out to meet us, some fellow BC boys who were playing hockey in Montreal. THAT"S what being a Canuck is!

#55 inane

inane

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,105 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 07

Posted 31 December 2012 - 03:58 PM

The checks and balances that used to apply to U.S. decision making have so been badly eroded, and the actions of the power elite have been so disconcerting in recent years, that any attempt to make changes to the Constitution are not going to viewed in the same light as in the past.


What does that mean? It might be hard so forget it? I just don't understand the all or nothing point of view. Restricting or eliminating access to certain guns is not banning them or denying anyone's rights. But start talking about it and its like you're denying them the right to breathe or something.
  • 0

#56 Electro Rock

Electro Rock

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,681 posts
  • Joined: 17-March 04

Posted 31 December 2012 - 04:04 PM

What does that mean? It might be hard so forget it? I just don't understand the all or nothing point of view. Restricting or eliminating access to certain guns is not banning them or denying anyone's rights. But start talking about it and its like you're denying them the right to breathe or something.


Restriction and registration inevitably leads to confiscation, as we've seen so many times in the past. And in many examples of when rights or power were stripped from a population, people *did* end up ultimately being denied the right to breathe...
  • 1
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."

Norman Thomas

#57 Raoul Duke

Raoul Duke

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,192 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 04

Posted 31 December 2012 - 04:09 PM

I hear Dueling Banjos....
  • 0

TomBrady.jpg


#58 inane

inane

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,105 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 07

Posted 31 December 2012 - 04:12 PM

Restriction and registration inevitably leads to confiscation, as we've seen so many times in the past. And in many examples of when rights or power were stripped from a population, people *did* end up ultimately being denied the right to breathe...


Plenty of things are restricted--what makes guns so special? And do you honestly believe without your gun the government will kill you? Or, that your gun gives you security?
  • 0

#59 Electro Rock

Electro Rock

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,681 posts
  • Joined: 17-March 04

Posted 31 December 2012 - 04:19 PM

Plenty of things are restricted--what makes guns so special? And do you honestly believe without your gun the government will kill you? Or, that your gun gives you security?


In my family history, on both sides of the family, having guns made all the difference. I'm speaking of WW2 France and early 20th century Dixie America here.

When it comes down to it, people, whether individuals or organizations, respect strength and abuse weakness.
  • 1
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."

Norman Thomas

#60 inane

inane

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,105 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 07

Posted 31 December 2012 - 04:23 PM

In my family history, on both sides of the family, having guns made all the difference. I'm speaking of WW2 France and early 20th century Dixie America here.

When it comes down to it, people, whether individuals or organizations, respect strength and abuse weakness.


This isn't early 20th century dixie america... Nor are you a militia.

Why are guns so important when hundreds of other things are regulated/restricted?
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.